After 51 years of service, the historic aircraft carrier is about to be decommissioned.

When the USS Enterprise (CVN 65) sailed away from Norfolk, Virginia, on its maiden voyage in 1962, it was the worlds first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and the eighth Enterprise in a long dynasty reaching back to the Revolutionary War. Its eight nuclear reactors, reported the Chicago Daily Defender, had an energy potential "as great as that of all the reactors in the free world."

The most recent Enterprise played a role in the Cuban Missile Crisis, along with other ships in the Second Fleet, blockading shipments of military equipment to Cuba. During the height of the Vietnam War, nearly 100 aircraft were launched each day from the Enterprise, laden with explosives and bound for the Ho Chi Minh Trail. After the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the carrierheaded home after a long deploymentsteamed overnight to the North Arabian Sea to participate in Operation Enduring Freedom.

On December 1, 2012, the carrier will be inactivated, ending 51 years of service. See the gallery above for more about its history. Here, two F/A-18 Super Hornets fly past the Enterprise on its last deployment, on October 4, 2012.

There has been an Enterprise since 1775, when Captain James Smith was ordered to Lake Champlain to take command of the 70-ton sloop that originally belonged to the British. Enterprise II was an eight-gun schooner purchased in 1776 that convoyed transports in the Chesapeake Bay. Enterprise III, a 12-gun schooner, searched for British privateers off the coast of Maine in 1812. Enterprise IV launched from the New York Navy Yard in 1831; while Enterprise V, a steam corvette with auxiliary sail power, was commissioned in 1877. . | 2 of 9 | Next »»

What are they going to replace it with? Let me guess: we don’t need a military and a navy anymore because Obama’s contant appologizing has made the world into a peaceful, love-sick planet filled with butterflies and rainbows, puppy dogs and cotton candy meadows where children laugh and play with terrorists. We don’t need a space program either because space will come to us.

2
posted on 11/30/2012 5:43:37 AM PST
by Telepathic Intruder
(The only thing the Left has learned from the failures of socialism is not to call it that)

What is kind of sickening is that today’s “Global Force For Good” will not name another carrier “Enterprise”. We are now politically correct, so screw tradition. Farewell, Enterprise - and thanks for 51 extremely good years. Thousands of us who sailed on you will always have fond memories to cherish.

Why is this ship not being preserved as a museum? You would think that the first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, one of the longest-serving ships ever in the Navy, and the namesake of the Navy’s most decorated ship of World War II would be worth preserving and saving for future generations instead of “dismantling and recycling.” Then again, the mighty CV-6 wasn’t saved either.

They’ll dismantle so much of the internals of the ship around the reactors there won’t be much left of it. My dad’s ship, the USS Gilmore AS-16 was basically gutted around the nuclear areas from services to nuclear submarines. There was a huge void in the middle of the ship from it over multiple decks from pictures I’ve seen of it at James River.

I hope the Navy is able to keep the tradition of naming a major capital ship "Enterprise". One of the things I found appealing about the Star Trek series, especially the last one aptly named Enterprise, was that there was this connection in a far future world with this proud tradition of naming ships, even star ships, Enterprise.

Unfortunately in our politically correct world we now are naming navy ships after Caesar Chavez. Under Obama I fear our once proud navy will be reduced to a few dilapidated frigates bearing names like Chairman Mao and Gertrude Stein

A good buddy served aboard the Enterprise, he must have been a LT at the time. He is quite sad, no doubt most who served aboard are as well. Luckily he was able to score tickets for him and the family to attend the ceremony.

I didn’t serve aboard the Big E, but the first work I did after retiring from the Navy was installation of the LAN on her. I served on John F. Kennedy, Nimitz, and Dwight D. Eisenhower.

I used to joke about the carriers, that there was 4 classes of carriers (at the time), Midway, Forrestal, Kitty Hawk, and Nimitz along with “the experiment” and “the bastard stepchild.” The experiment was the Enterprise, “let’s see if we can build a nuclear powered carrier.” The bastard stepchild was the JFK, the ship that was supposed to be the lead of the new nuclear carriers but was built conventional because Congress didn’t want to spend the money.

Watching a news report on Big E this morning almost brought tears to my eyes. It’s sad to see a ship die.

30
posted on 11/30/2012 9:37:55 AM PST
by fredhead
(It's my Herbie year...check out the number on the side of the famous VW.)

Back in ‘66 we had a diving job on the USS ENTERPRISE in Subic Bay, PI. The ships crew needed to install new packing on one of the rudder posts.

Our job was to install a dam around the rudder post underwater. Once it was installed the ships crew removed the packing glands and installed new packing.

We spent a few hours doing the job. Our diving barge was tied to the stern. One of our guys took a chipping hammer to the paint on the stern about 5 feet above the waterline. When he was finished he had written “HUEY”, his name, on the stern.

I read the whole article before I commented a**hat. Regardless of whom posted the caption it is in the wrong place and my comment was valid. That carrier is not the Nuke Enterprise and those are not jets. Please take your snarky a**ed comments and shove them up your Obama.

I had the honor of serving on the USS Enterprise 1983-1986. She was my first ship. I remember standing on the pier in Alameda, fresh from A school, and looking up at that huge monster and thinking, “What the hell have I got myself into?”

44
posted on 11/30/2012 4:55:35 PM PST
by aomagrat
(Gun owners who vote for democrats are too stupid to own guns.)

You are the ignorant one. I merely made an observation that the caption was pinned to the wrong photo and you took offense for some reason even though I was correct, writing several nasty comments to me, in one of which you called me lazy and a coward. What did you expect me to do, thank you for it? Don't want to get nasty comments from people? Then don't send them nasty ones first.

In my opinion your actions make you an ignorant jackass and that is me being polite.

Why is this ship not being preserved as a museum? You would think that the first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, one of the longest-serving ships ever in the Navy, and the namesake of the Navys most decorated ship of World War II would be worth preserving and saving for future generations instead of dismantling and recycling.

The Navy's explanation, as noted earlier, is that the ship will need to be deconstructed past the point of economical repair in order to get to the reactors.

Enterprise is a modified Kitty Hawk-class hull, and her eight reactors roughly correspond to the eight boilers that the Kitty Hawks carried (apparently Enterprise has two more reactors than necessary; Hyman Rickover - allegedly - personally ordered the number increased from six to eight to correspond to the Kitty Hawk boiler numbers).

The ship was built around the reactors. USN policy for scrapping nuclear wessels (inside Star Trek joke there) is to defuel then remove the reactor vessels intact for containment and burial at Hanford. Getting to the eight reactors and removing them per this policy is going to require cutting massive holes straight down from the flight deck. It's going to be a brutal undertaking, given not only how the reactors are shielded but also the armor plating on the hangar and flight decks.

HOWEVER .... (and there's always a however)

There's been some speculation that the Enterprise was actually designed to have its reactor vessels removed and replaced. Enterprise was the first nuclear carrier, essentially a prototype/proof-of-concept that was both wildly expensive to build and maintain but also highly successful (she was designed with a 25-year lifespan in mind), and she carried early (2nd generation?) nuclear reactors.

The USN had already replaced a prototype (liquid sodium cooled) reactor in the USS Seawolf (the second nuclear submarine after Nautilus). Given that experience, the expense associated with Enterprise (2x as much as a Kitty Hawk and so costly that she was completed without any defensive weaponry) and the very real possibility of having problems with a reactor at some point that would be serious enough to warrant replacement of the reactor but otherwise wouldn't compromise the integrity of the ship (requiring complete removal from service very early in its career and flushing a $500 million investment right down the toilet), it does make logical sense that the Navy would have contingency plans to swap out the reactors.

The USN has shown an extreme reticence towards preserving nuclear-powered ships as museums. Nautilus is the only one, and even though her reactor was yanked when decommissioned in the mid 1980s the Navy still owns her and maintains operational control. Efforts to preserve the nuclear cruiser USS Long Beach and the submarines USS Cincinnati and USS Mariano G. Vallejo were denied outright. Senator John Warner tried really hard to get the nuclear cruiser USS Virginia for Nauticus in Norfolk and was politely told "no" and given the battleship Wisconsin and the lead ship of the next class of SSNs as a consolation prize. Heck, if you go to the Udvar-Hazy center for the National Air and Space Museum they have an F6F Hellcat that was flown - as a drone - through the fallout from the Bikini tests ... and the placard for the plane very specifically points out that there's only trace amounts of residual radiation.

So given all that, while I'm inclined to believe the Navy when they say that they really do have to cut Enterprise to pieces to get the reactors out, I do have a nagging feeling that if the truth were otherwise they'd never willingly let it be known.

I merely made an observation that the caption was pinned to the wrong photo and you took offense for some reason even though I was correct,

Once again you are incorrect. Once again there is no caption attached to the photo. A description of that photo and all other photos in the article are embedded in the text of the article. Most of those reading the article figured that out. You didn't.

In your initial comment you have publicly acknowledged that you aren't very bright, are easily confused and directed your criticism of the layout of the article at the wrong person. You are in the distinct minority and have exposed your own ignorance despite your wail to the contrary. You emote, you do not think because you are incapable of thinking. You ponder that the next time you sit down to void your bladder, madame.

Instead of publicly flaunting your deficient grey matter, which is not a character trait to be proud of, pay attention to what is actually written not what you perceive to be written. Had you bothered to visit the source you would have discovered that the photo of CV-6 is on page 2 of 9, not page 1 of 9. Now apologize to lbryce for being as dense as a slab of granite and shut your gaping, whining, ignorant maw.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.